Democratic (Party) Direction

There have already been DSA-affiliated and other lefty local candidates getting elected to stuff recently.

I mean maybe, sure, anything's possible, but it's hard to list all of the reasons the deck is stacked against DSA type candidates in local races.

Khalid Kamau springs immediately to mind but I'm sure there are others xp

I love Warren but I've recently come to the conclusion that she could never get elected president so I hope she doesn't run. I just think she falls into that same category as Kerry or Gore or Hillary where, fair or not, her personality is just a non-starter. Obviously their personalities are unattractive to voters for different reasons but I think the end result is the same.

Again, I love what she stands for and I would vote for her in a second, but unless she radically transformed her public persona, I think she's just always going to come across to a wide swath of people as a supercilious schoolteacher, which is not really the personality type that makes people eager to stand in line to vote for you.

Just because it's hard doesn't mean it's not worth doing. xp

Simon i agree with you and i agree with your party plan I'm just waxing hopeless about lefties getting on the ballot and winning, say, state senate seats or even city council in non-Portland urban areas

Oh, there's a meme? That settles it then

They are our future and you know it

Both Kamau and the other person mentioned in the recent Voxplainer (Renitta Shannon) are in Georgia fwiw xp

They also supported (iirc?) Chokwe Lumumba in Jackson, MI

The answer to that is no. There should be no room for such a critique without an intersectional understanding of the way race and gender impact who wants and gets those jobs.

Deval Patrick isn't an accountant working at Wal-Mart HQ - he's an incredibly powerful man who can choose to work anywhere he wants to and make large sums of money.

I don't...are you calling my husband a blue dog? So glad you cleared up that he's not on the left. I'll be sure to let him know.

Um... what? You said your husband was reading between the lines that criticism of Harris/Patrick/Booker was really about how they wouldn't appeal to the white working class. How is saying that that argument isn't the domain of Ryan Cooper (who has the piece that is the entirety of group criticism of them), who doesn't even allude to the WWC, calling your husband a blue dog?

I'm glad one tweet from 9 months ago that was dissected ad nauseam can still be dishonestly deployed.

If only he'd said anything else on the topic in all these several months.

idk man i feel like the 2016 primaries aren't over or something xp

Again, I voted for Sanders in the primaries, I support his agenda by and large, but I perceive a blind spot on the topic by his repeated concentration on economic arguments almost to the complete exclusion of racial arguments.

I love Warren but I've recently come to the conclusion that she could never get elected president so I hope she doesn't run. I just think she falls into that same category as Kerry or Gore or Hillary where, fair or not, her personality is just a non-starter. Obviously their personalities are unattractive to voters for different reasons but I think the end result is the same.

Again, I love what she stands for and I would vote for her in a second, but unless she radically transformed her public persona, I think she's just always going to come across to a wide swath of people as a supercilious schoolteacher, which is not really the personality type that makes people eager to stand in line to vote for you.

― evol j, Monday, August 7, 2017 9:56 AM (thirty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

otm, warren is great and i'm happy she is in the senate but she would be a terrible presidential candidate imo and would definitely lose

xp like, he really seems to sincerely think that if we begin attacking the economic inequality issues at their roots, the racial issues will take care of themselves or be swept away -- it's variation of the "rising tide lifts all boats" thing and it's . . . incorrect, to be generous.

Again, I voted for Sanders in the primaries, I support his agenda by and large, but I perceive a blind spot on the topic by his repeated concentration on economic arguments almost to the complete exclusion of racial arguments.

It would definitely not have killed him to point out that the sorts of reforms he wants (eg free college and single payer) would disproportionately benefit people of color who as we all know tend to get more of an economic squeeze under current configurations

re: left alternative, I've heard people talking about Jeff Merkley from Oregon

I think it's utopian to argue that an economically egalitarian society would be free of racial or sexual (or ableist etc.) prejudice, but it's also strange to me to argue that scarcity (genuine or manufactured) doesn't exacerbate divisions intensely

otm, warren is great and i'm happy she is in the senate but she would be a terrible presidential candidate imo and would definitely lose

I know I am ~emotional and shit~ but I felt that way about another actual pres candidate and still do. Then your opposition is suddenly two scoops and yr metrics get fucked up. Yr right tho it's best to support great candidates who can also win.

oh and don't forget Randy Bryce (aka@IronStache) in WI, gunning for Ryan's seat

I got shit last year for saying I was delighted Warren is in the Senate and should stay there.

otm

I think nearly all of us proved last year we have NO IDEA who "can win."

celebrities and media personalities can win. Warren is not that. (I'm not convinced that Harris or Patrick or Booker is either, tbh)

I got shit last year for saying I was delighted Warren is in the Senate and should stay there.

― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, August 7, 2017 10:53 AM (thirty-five minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I think she could have beaten someone like JEB! or Rubio or Cruz, but not Trump. believe me I'm not happy about it.

as kingfish never tires of pointing out, it's the narrative that matters not the specific policy provisions. So someone who can beat Trump as a celebrity, who is more *exciting* to vote for because they tap into a dominant narrative arc that a majority of people can subscribe to - like Obama - is who wins.

celebrities and media personalities can win. Warren is not that. (I'm not convinced that Harris or Patrick or Booker is either, tbh)

― Οὖτις, Monday, August 7, 2017 11:32 AM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

agree, which is why if I had the power to compel one person to run for president it would be Michelle Obama.

None of us know what kind of toxic matrix will exist in 2020 either.

fuck celebrities, i believe that's called "going low"

fuck dynasties too

xp

i'd vote for warren in a heartbeat. i can't speak for my patriotic fellow americans, though. and hey, i get that the average voter doesn't want to listen to someone with an intellectual/education vibe. i don't want to go to a class and learn something, or have a political leader who actually enjoys that shit. school is for losers! no, give me that bottled up raw realness and passion, the devil may care flair for creating moments of unexpected unity among the electorate. in short, give me, uh, tim kaine.

oh and don't forget Randy Bryce (aka@IronStache) in WI, gunning for Ryan's seat

this dude was at the WI State Fair this weekend. idk how much of a shot he really has but I'm a fan. seeing Paul Ryan get unseated by some regular schmuck with no political experience would be amazing.

let it be noted that the good Dr. wants to "go high", just like Hillary

xp

I love Charles Pierce, but I can't stand when he calls Warren the Senator Professor.

I'd vote for Tim Kaine's son.

milo, you yourself is part of the problem when you say stuff like:

re: Patrick, which critiques or questions focus on the fact that he has a business career rather than where he's worked? Is there no room for the idea that no one should be given a free pass for being an executive with Bain Capital, an entity which actively hurts more peoples' lives than it helps?

― louie mensch (milo z), 7. august 2017 03:07 (eight hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The answer to that is no. There should be no room for such a critique without an intersectional understanding of the way race and gender impact who wants and gets those jobs. Class and race and gender is intertwined, and just as centrist liberals might use identity politics for strategic reasons while overlooking class, a large proportion of the left insist on a focusing on class to the exclusion of identity, which is off-putting to a lot of would be allies. Simple as that. You can insist all you like that 'left voters are more progressive on everything identity politics is actually about', but you repeatedly demonstrate the exact opposite.

― Frederik B, Monday, August 7, 2017 5:25 AM (six hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

if this is the logical meeting place of intersectionality and politics, get me off the mailing list. it's one thing to reserve judgment for private citizens who may have different views from you based on how they grew up. it's another to not challenge politicians whose views and votes are going to harm the people of this country. people making policy for millions of other people don't get a pass based on their background. that's insanity

if the last election taught us anything it's that maybe we shouldn't be making hard-and-fast rules about what kind of candidates can and cannot get elected

important thought experiment: what if the 2020 election was moved up just a bit, say.... to next week. and you (a low-tier god who is still paying attention to U.S. politics even though you could be eternally fucking in the cosmic waves instead or whatever) are tasked with picking a candidate who can generate the most enthusiasm among democrats in this very short period of time. there's not really enough time to worry about all the normal factors - campaign donations, advertising strategies, how to prevent state attorney generals from trying to keep everyone who isn't an elderly white person from voting, etc. instead, it basically comes down to a televised rally at some big stadium, simulcast on all the news networks. so you probably need to pick someone who already has some name recognition but also has the ability to inspire people, and seems like they aren't a total tool.

who would you pick?

after the thrones style epilogue: this post is dumb because i don't even know what i would say in response. that covers most of my posts. good luck usa, i'm voting for zuckerberg

Can you really choose anyone but Bernie or Hillary in that scenario?

yeah

I mean it would have to be one of them, just on enthusiasm/name recognition

ok, 6th sense style twist ending: bernie and hillary were on the same flight to the conference of near-champions in a distant land, but their plane mysteriously disappeared. they are no longer possible candidates in this scenario.

I don't think anyone else in the party even has 50% name recognition... so Al Gore, I guess? A guy named Steve who mysteriously looks like Obama with a beard?

xp Bern and Hillz might also smell of loserdom at this point.

In this scenario, could we bend the rules to just get Obama back?

a large proportion of the left insist on a focusing on class to the exclusion of identity

I'm not sure that this proportion is really as large as people make it seem; nevertheless (sorry to keep going back to DSA but I was following convention stuff this weekend) to see DSA elect diverse slates and formally endorse reparations, as well as forming specific afro-socialist and disability caucuses is encouraging, and hopefully a sign that the incipient young left, by and large, takes these concerns seriously

xpost nope, term limits still apply. michelle obama would be eligible, though.

Mecha-Hillbern?

Jeff Merkley

To milo: I was talking about this paragraph, where I read you as saying that my husband's cynicism about the motives behind critiques of black politicians was distrust of the left. He would describe himself as on the left, fwiw. I am not endorsing his take on Cooper's critique, because he hasn't even read it. He's a little paranoid right now, because he's a black man in a country where white resentment of people like him just determined an election.

I wouldn't call that distrust within the left, that's distrust of the left - and something that can't be countered. It's an unfortunate narrative, we even see how it's spread here, because it leaves the left unable to defend itself - no matter how much evidence there is that left voters are more progressive on everything identity politics is actually about, you get accused of arguing in bad faith or that the only reason a centrist is getting criticized is racism/etc.. The people who rend their garments over the WWC aren't going to DSA meetings, they're asshole blue dogs like Jim Webb.